BBC Guilty of Aiding Terrorists in 911?

10Apr

Building 7: Going, Going, Gone.

This is an amazing report.

On September 11th, A.D. 2001 (9/11) four commercial aircraft where high-jacked. One of those aircraft allegedly crashed into some farmland on Pennsylvania, but the remaining three allegedly struck three buildings: the two Twin Towers at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Pentagon was severely damaged; each of the Twin Towers were collapsed and utterly destroyed–but amazingly, a fourth building (the 43-story, Building 7 at the World Trade Center) also collapsed even though it was not struck by any aircraft or significant debris from the adjacent Twin Towers.

Why Building 7 collapsed has never been adequately explained in any official report.

Adding to the Building 7 mystery is the fact that, 20 minutes before Building 7 actually collapsed, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reported the collapse had already happened.

How could the BBC report that Building 7 had already collapsed when it would not collapse for another 20 minutes–unless the BBC were to some degree complicit in Building 7’s fall?

Tony Rooke is the principal behind the following video. Mr. Rooke pays an annual subscription fee to the BBC for his cable TV. However, Mr. Rooke refused to pay his annual licensing fee to the BBC on the grounds that the BBC must’ve been complicit in the 911 attack–if only because the BBC had knowledge of the Building 7 collapse before that collapse took place and failed to report that attack to the authorities as required by law. The BBC sued Mr. Rooke to collect his licensing fee. The judge ruled in Mr. Rooke’s favor.

In other words, an English trial court judge agreed that there was sufficient evidence of BBC complicity (advance knowledge) in the collapse of Building 7, that Mr. Rooke could lawfully refuse to pay BBC a licensing fee.

Thus, an English court has implicitly ruled that the official reports on who and what are responsible for 9/11–and particularly, the collapse of Building 7–are wrong.

Almost 12 years after the 911 attack were are beginning to see “official” verification of our various 9/11 “conspiracy theories”. It appears that just as Mr. Shakespeare observed, sooner or later, “The truth will out.”

17 responses to “BBC Guilty of Aiding Terrorists in 911?”

@ > Will use this argument next time in traffic court.
If you,kanani,are accused of “violating” a law, just say you didn’t violate it, you just disregarded it. This is what Pope Francis of ASSisi is quoted as doing.

That might not be such a bad idea. I had a friend who lived in a decent residential community. He parked two or three old vehicles on his lawn and it bugged his neighbors. The cops came and demanded that he remove the junk vehicles from his property. He replied that they were not “junk vehicles”–they were “lawn art”. The cops left and did not return. The “lawn art” stayed on the lawn. See, there’s a law against parking “junk vehicles” on your lawn, but there’s no law against placing “lawn art” on your lawn.

Law is a word game similar to Simon Sez or Mother May I?. It’s all about words. If you can make an astute use of words, you may be able to keep the cops at bay.

If you “violate” certain laws, you can be punished for committing a crime. But if, instead of “violating” a law, you merely “disregarded” it, there might not be a punishment for disregarding. For “violating,” punishment; for “disregarding,” no punishment?

I wouldn’t bet that this strategy would work, but I can see how it might.

“I didn’t violate the law, your Honor–I merely disregarded it.”

I’d have to study the definitions of “violate” and “disregard” to have a stronger opinion on whether this strategy might work.

But the law in question only applied to certain persons (U.S. citizens?) and you were not a US citizen, would you be free to disregard that law? If the law only applied in a particular venue (a territory) and you were in a different venue (a State of the Union), would you be free to disregard? I suspect the answer is Yes.

I would not be that an attempt to merely “disregard” a law would cause an alleged “violation” to be dismissed on a regular basis. But if a defendant could support his claim to have “disregarded” that law because he is no personally subject to that law, or because he was acting in a venue where that law does not apply–that defendant might be able to make the judge et al blink.

Al, I don’t know who did it, or who organized it, or who authorized it, or why it was conveniently “COORDINATED” at that time, but if you watch the video clips of building 7, it is
clear that the windows blow with compression flashes at spaced intervals, and then the whole building falls in on itself.

Having watched numerous “authorized” or “publicly organized” implosions of buildings, they do the very same thing. To hold in on the debris field, they wrap kevlar blankets around the columns they are cutting, which muffles some of the explosions. Also, it takes a couple of weeks for the explosives company to analyze the building, decide where to drill in and place their charges, then link each of them in the order they are going to be detonated, with DETCORD, and then keep everyone out except inspectors until the day of countdown, and that all is supposed to take place AFTER the permits have been applied for and approved from numerous public servant officials, having it also cleared with the suppliers of gas, water, electricity, and that usually takes several weeks to months in advance, so THAT means that either someone got all those permits and explosives installed well in advance of 9-11 and it just so HAPPENED that the twin-tower attacks accidentally merged with the authorized implosion of building 7, OR, OR, something much more insidious took place.

Will we EVER learn who bought those “puts” on the airline companies? Will we EVER learn what happened with the supposedly stored X amount of gold in the basements of the twin towers? How did that gold disappear, if it did not vaporize? (youtube: biggest gold heist in history). Probably not.

It’s over. I don’t know, but it seems like it just doesn’t matter. Like so many other issues that the sheeple masses don’t care about, they seem to only care about what they are spoon-fed by the standard media.

This is almost like watching people on the deck of the Titanic argue about whether the ship should be steered to the “left” or steered to the “right”, when the hull has already been ruptured and is taking on water, instead of abandoning ship while they can and getting as far away from it as possible to not be sucked under by the downward current.

That figurative iceberg for the United States of America, in my opinion, was the unlawful, unconstitutional delegation of our Congress in 1913 to allow a group of bankers be in control of our currency that is created out of THIN AIR, (Please see National Geographic January 1993 article pg 84) where they have it printed at cost (avg. 3 cents per bill regardless of denomination) and we have to borrow it into circulation, put up collateral in the form of T Bills and bonds to back that loan, and they never print the interest, so this nation HAS to grow deeper and deeper into debt each year, no matter who is in control of the Presidency, and they, (the Federal Reserve) are exempt from the Income Tax.

These undeniable facts paint a very real picture similar to what many other nations are facing, that have been INDUCED into accepting that form of banking system, and SOONER OR LATER, is as bleak and as SURE as the Titanic bow rising hundreds of feet out of that cold Atlantic ocean water, before breaking in two and sinking on that fateful day April 15, 1912.

We are witnessing America’s bow rising. Will it too, break into two parts before sinking? Only time wil tell.

That figurative iceberg for the United States of America, in my opinion, was the unlawful, unconstitutional delegation of our Congress in 1913 to allow a group of bankers be in control of our currency that is created out of THIN AIR, (Please see National Geographic January 1993 article pg 84) where they have it printed at cost (avg. 3 cents per bill regardless of denomination) and we have to borrow it into circulation, put up collateral in the form of T Bills and bonds to back that loan, and they never print the interest, so this nation HAS to grow deeper and deeper into debt each year, no matter who is in control of the Presidency, and they, (the Federal Reserve) are exempt from the Income Tax.

DOUG SAYS: Truth be told, the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT [legally] overthrew the CON-sti-stupid without awakening most Americans. My reasons for recognizing this overthrow are based upon the many very intelligent “Patriots” that have suffered incarceration or worse while arguing the CON-sti-stupid in court when they were legally bound by contract or agreement to the tax. (Admitting that I agreed with their comprehensive analysis of the constitutional arguments but understand now that the application of Constitutional defenses are only good in a Constitutional jurisdiction – not in a commercial jurisdiction).

You and I have the CONSTITUTIONAL right of uninhibited contracts – which could include contracting into another jurisdiction – so let the contractor beware.

While most complain about the “monetary” drain caused by the “income tax” my concern lies with the usurpation of the Constitution by and through deception. Americans have become accustomed to residing in a debt bubble of incomprehensible consequence without accepting the FACT that debtors have NO RIGHTS. That’s why the founders established the true government upon a solid / debt free Gold and Silver monetary basis.

Once one understands that the “SUPREME LAW of the LAND” (Constitution) demands the operation of gold and silver coin as the “medium of exchange” and that any substitute or variance puts Constitutional Law on the back burner or for that matter on another planet.

A group of American business and political leaders are building a pro-Israel media “war room” in Washington, D.C. The group will be called “Emet”—which in Hebrew means “truth.” Emet will try to address biased media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and also make the case that the conflict, while serious and important, pales in comparison to the larger geo-strategic threat posed to the United States and the West by Iran and Iraq, both of whom are trying to build and/or acquire weapons of mass destruction. Funding Emet is Leonard Abramson; he sold U.S. Healthcare to Aetna in the mid-1990s for $8.9 billion. Abramson has recruited a powerful board of directors, including Bernie Marcus, founder of Home Depot; Les Wexner, founder of The Limited; Edgar Bronfman Sr., who once owned Seagram’s; and Lou Ranieri, a major Wall Street player who now co-owns one of Israel’s largest banks. Also joining the board are Jeane Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, and Jack Kemp.

shortly before 9/11 – the crackhouse called Congress was allegedly going to ‘Reopen’ the Waco so-called ‘Investigation’ and hold a new round of ‘hearings’….on the Massmurder case, which would have led ostensibly to OKC….

in fact when Jesus declared that He made “us” free, [http://bible.cc/john/8-36.htm]
it is truly astonishing that so many insist on mocking and scoffing and blasphemeing on behalf of the stool sculpture deity cult compound {leaders} of the colluding media and the nonchalant chicanery of the poltroonish crack whores called politicians…for filthy lucre.

Yo dude. Why do you hide behind andy Kauffman’s alias? I am a Federalist and Patriot. And seek the like. So clifton. Let me follow your traffic; but if your a true American/Cop or marine or just a staunch Republican. Why hide bro? Who are you afraid of? The Jewish People. Hit me up. f.chalow@aol.com What is EMET?

I think Emet means truth in Hebrew & is an abbreviation for epistemology or has something to do with it.

Jerry S

April 11, 2013 at 2:23 PM

FRAUD DEFINED

“Fraud includes a false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. Any kind of artifice employed by one person to deceive another.” Accord, Goldstein v. Equitable Life Assurance. Soc. of U. S., 160 Misc. 364, 289 N.Y.S. 1064, 1067; and, from Johnson v. McDonald, 39 P.2d 150: “Bad faith” and “fraud” are synonymous and also synonyms of dishonesty, infidelity, faithlessness, unfairness, perfidy etc.” The Court, in U.S. V. Hardy, 299 F. 2d 600, Cert. Denied, 370 U.S. 912, say: “It is held that a fraud, once committed, is a continuing thing, precluding another from pleading the statute of limitations.” (underlining is my emphasis).

There is no jurisdiction conferred, implied, or gained through fraud, and since this matter originated in fraud, it remains in fraud. “Once a Fraud, always a Fraud”. (13 Viner’s Abridgment 539) This fraud taints all who come in contact with it and failure to take action to eliminate the fraud makes them fraud artists.

“. . . process which results from fraud, trickery, artifice or wrongful device is invalid and does not justify the exercise of jurisdiction by such court over the person so served with process; and upon proof that service of process has been so obtained, it will be vacated and set aside.” supreme court of appeals of west virginia 142 W. Va. 188; 95 S.E.2d 427.

My comment > All of the above may be “dicta” so therefore is meaningless,right palani? Still, I think the key is on HOW to use the above correctly in presenting my/your position. I apparently don’t know how OR I present my “position” to those who exist & live high on the HOG via FRAUD itself.

I agree with your definitions of fraud and think it’s applicable to our monetary system (and most everything else we’ve been indoctrinated to accept).

That being said, fraud has so saturated our lives that the majority can only perceive survival based upon the fraud. People that even understand the clear-cut fraud called Social(ist) Security cling to it with white knuckled determination because (IMHO) THEY DON’T TRUST GOD as much as the sick demonics running the world.

The majority of Americans don’t have a clue about the monetary system because it makes their head hurt and it would be inconvenient not to have a credit card or debit card. They FEAR that they might not survive w/o Social(ist) Security or Medicare … [which causes me to inquire wtf did the world do before 1935 ???]

The funny thing about faith is that it doesn’t work until you actually test it. We can only offer God our absolute TRUST. In turn we receive His Absolute Protection. It’s a promise and God (being God) cannot lie.

I am grateful that our “Father & his Son” look upon/into our hearts more so than our intellectual capacity. Thank you Doug, DEAR Brother. One of these days I will be able to give you a big “bear hug.” I’m looking forward to it.

Lex Mercatoria

April 12, 2013 at 8:57 PM

9/11 == just another in a never ending series of media hoaxes.

True, the 7 building WTC complex no longer stands but the media’s imagery depicting how we went from standing buildings to no buildings is a fabrication consisting of composite video, Photoshopped pictures, disposable 3rd-rate actors posing as “witnesses” & “victims'” family members, and some CGI. The “victims” are nothing more than SIMS–computer created portraits.

The only real difference between the two halves of the media industry are the labels: one is called “entertainment,” the other “news.” People’s reactions to something can differ greatly simply on how that thing is labelled. We don’t really know what 9/11 looked like because no authentic imagery of whatever happened that day has surfaced in the public and there is no evidence to analyze.

There weren’t “all the media, security and cell phone recorders” in use to record anything. That presumes an event happened as depicted for people to record. All the media’s visual evidence demonstrates otherwise.

The PTB are exploiting psychological & perceptual weaknesses we have. Television is a simulation of reality. To make it real for people all one need do is label a story “news” and you can get them to believe most anything.